SPOTY 2022

[ProfessorDavey]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/63887059

Is it just me, or does this rather short list seem somewhat uninspiring.

I think probably Stokes or Mead should win, but there is always the difficulty singling out a single player in a team event. Probably easier to make a case for Stokes as cricket is a team game but involves individual battles between bat and ball that football doesn't really have. I think the completely revolutionary approach under Stokes and McCullum at test level also perhaps sets him apart.

[jeremyp]

Well 2022 seems to have been a "nearly" year for a lot of British sport. There aren't many really memorable performances.

I think I'll put my money on Ben Stokes. The England triumph in Pakistan is fresh in everybody's minds. Plus England won the T20's.

[ProfessorDavey]

They have also named the shortlist for young sports personality of the year.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/63779048

Three nominees, all women - I don't think the BBC would dare have a shortlist which was entirely male any more. Why is it acceptable then to have a shortlist that is entirely female?

[Outrider]

Is it just me, or does this rather short list seem somewhat uninspiring.

I'm not a big follower of the other sports, but to put it into perspective, if one of the male footballers had broken the England goal-scoring record for a season, been named player of the tournament and won the Golden Boot at the Euros, been part of a Euros winning team, runner up for the Ballon D'Or as well as an outstanding domestic league season for goals and assists they'd be a shoe-in.

Three nominees, all women - I don't think the BBC would dare have a shortlist which was entirely male any more. Why is it acceptable then to have a shortlist that is entirely female?

To make up for the number of times when, despite the dearth of actual personality amongst the male sport stars, they still opted to give awards to the likes of personality vacuum Ryan Giggs than look to women's sport?

Or perhaps because, in their fields, those young women have outperformed any of the young men this year, and they are simply the best three young sports personalities of any gender, and the BBC haven't cared if their list is only one gender.

O.

[ProfessorDavey]

To make up for the number of times when, despite the dearth of actual personality amongst the male sport stars, they still opted to give awards to the likes of personality vacuum Ryan Giggs than look to women's sport?

Sure but that is from years ago and currently there is no way the BBC would have a shortlist for the main award that were all men.

Or perhaps because, in their fields, those young women have outperformed any of the young men this year, and they are simply the best three young sports personalities of any gender, and the BBC haven't cared if their list is only one gender.

That may be so - but I doubt that they'd have had an all male list had those people been the best three young sports personalities of any gender.

My point is that you either just pick the best people or you pick the best, but also ensuring a gender balance. The BBC seem to be mixing and matching.

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm not a big follower of the other sports, but to put it into perspective, if one of the male footballers had broken the England goal-scoring record for a season, been named player of the tournament and won the Golden Boot at the Euros, been part of a Euros winning team, runner up for the Ballon D'Or as well as an outstanding domestic league season for goals and assists they'd be a shoe-in.

I'm not convinced - it would depend on the other nominees. Footballers rarely do well because it is much harder to demonstrate that stand-out achievement as an individual in a team sport rather than an individual sport.

Just to provide perspective - the award has been going on since 1954, so this will be I think the 68th. In that time there have only been 11 winners from team sports and just five footballers, despite football being the most watched sport in the UK by some margin.

[jeremyp]

I'm not a big follower of the other sports, but to put it into perspective, if one of the male footballers had broken the England goal-scoring record for a season, been named player of the tournament and won the Golden Boot at the Euros, been part of a Euros winning team, runner up for the Ballon D'Or as well as an outstanding domestic league season for goals and assists they'd be a shoe-in.

So a hypothetical. Bukayo Saka wins the Golden Boot at the 2022 World Cup and England lift the trophy. Saka is also player of the tournament.

Does he win SPotY? He probably does. I think Beth Mead is a worthy winner.

[ProfessorDavey]

So a hypothetical. Bukayo Saka wins the Golden Boot at the 2022 World Cup and England lift the trophy. Saka is also player of the tournament.

Does he win SPotY? He probably does.

For consistency it would need to be the Euros not the world cup. But I think probably you are correct, but not a locked on certainty because of the team-sport issue. If he was up against an individual sport person with an equivalent stellar year I think he may lose.

I think Beth Mead is a worthy winner.

I don't disagree, but I would have preferred Stokes as he not only won the T20 world cup (which surely is equivalent to winning the Euros) but has completely revolutionised the approach to playing test cricket (as captain along with McCullum) with records throughout the history of cricket falling.

Probably counted against Stokes that he won in 2019.

[Nearly Sane]

Didn't watch it but watched this today. Incredibly moving


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/64027090

[jeremyp]

For consistency it would need to be the Euros not the world cup.

I chose the World Cup because it is a similar level tournament that happened this year. If it had been the Euros, given the hysteria surrounding our appearance in the final last year, it probably would have resulted in the same outcome.

But I think probably you are correct, but not a locked on certainty because of the team-sport issue. If he was up against an individual sport person with an equivalent stellar year I think he may lose.

Yes, I agree, but isn't the point that Beth Mead wasn't up against such a person. As you said, the list this year is uninspiring.

I don't disagree, but I would have preferred Stokes as he not only won the T20 world cup (which surely is equivalent to winning the Euros) but has completely revolutionised the approach to playing test cricket (as captain along with McCullum) with records throughout the history of cricket falling.

Probably counted against Stokes that he won in 2019.

I don't think the T20 World Cup is the equivalent of the Euros, in public impact, if not prestige. I don't think the press coverage was anywhere near the level the Euros got. I couldn't even tell you who had the rights to televise the matches. The women's Euros were on the BBC who were advertising it as hard as they could.

[ProfessorDavey]

Yes, I agree, but isn't the point that Beth Mead wasn't up against such a person. As you said, the list this year is uninspiring.

Yup - that's true. None of the individual sport nominees were particularly inspiring.

I don't think the T20 World Cup is the equivalent of the Euros, in public impact, if not prestige. I don't think the press coverage was anywhere near the level the Euros got. I couldn't even tell you who had the rights to televise the matches. The women's Euros were on the BBC who were advertising it as hard as they could.

Hmm - that's debatable. At a basic level both are major international tournaments, one global the other for one continent. Sure there is the issue of broadcast coverage and the BBC does rather like to promote sports that it has the rights to.

However I think it is debatable at the very least that women's football has a greater profile and prestige globally than men's cricket. Now that may be wrong but realistically women's football remains a pretty minority sports in most places and that includes the UK, except for these most high profile tournaments.

Cricket is also, of course, a minority sport as it isn't played everywhere but actually there are countries with absolutely massive populations where cricket is massive - the largest sport by far.

Now I'm not entirely sure how these figures are recorded, but if accurate the T20 Cricket massively outstripped the women's Euro's in terms of global profile.

Uefa claim 365 million viewers globally for the Euros. The ICC claim 6.56 billion for the T20 tournament - so approximately 20 times greater. Interestingly the FIFA estimate for global viewing figures for the World Cup is 5 billion. So arguably the T20 cricket had a larger global audience than even the men's football world cup, let alone the women's Euro. Why - well because India and Pakistan with massive populations are obsessed with cricket.

[jeremyp]

Yup - that's true. None of the individual sport nominees were particularly inspiring.
Hmm - that's debatable. At a basic level both are major international tournaments, one global the other for one continent. Sure there is the issue of broadcast coverage and the BBC does rather like to promote sports that it has the rights to.

However I think it is debatable at the very least that women's football has a greater profile and prestige globally than men's cricket. Now that may be wrong but realistically women's football remains a pretty minority sports in most places and that includes the UK, except for these most high profile tournaments.

Cricket is also, of course, a minority sport as it isn't played everywhere but actually there are countries with absolutely massive populations where cricket is massive - the largest sport by far.

Now I'm not entirely sure how these figures are recorded, but if accurate the T20 Cricket massively outstripped the women's Euro's in terms of global profile.

Uefa claim 365 million viewers globally for the Euros. The ICC claim 6.56 billion for the T20 tournament - so approximately 20 times greater. Interestingly the FIFA estimate for global viewing figures for the World Cup is 5 billion. So arguably the T20 cricket had a larger global audience than even the men's football world cup, let alone the women's Euro. Why - well because India and Pakistan with massive populations are obsessed with cricket.

Figures of 5 or 6 billion are bogus. 6.56 billion means almost everybody watched the T20. I suspect they mean there were 6.56 billion viewings, not viewers.

In any case, the global figures are irrelevant since the voting constituency for SPotY is likely to be limited to the UK plus some expats.

[ProfessorDavey]

Figures of 5 or 6 billion are bogus. 6.56 billion means almost everybody watched the T20. I suspect they mean there were 6.56 billion viewings, not viewers.

Which is why I said I don't know how the numbers were generated. The point isn't the actual numbers but the relative number, each of which appear to be similar in their derivation and each officially from the governing organisation respectively, so Uefa, ICC, FIFA. The point is that viewing figures for the T20 cricket may be surprisingly high, likely way higher than for Uefa women's football (that doesn't really surprise me), but potentially higher than for the FIFA World cup. That might seem to be a surprise, but perhaps less so when you consider that just three of the countries in the T20 (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) have between them about 1.7 billion people.

[jeremyp]

Which is why I said I don't know how the numbers were generated. The point isn't the actual numbers but the relative number, each of which appear to be similar in their derivation and each officially from the governing organisation respectively, so Uefa, ICC, FIFA. The point is that viewing figures for the T20 cricket may be surprisingly high, likely way higher than for Uefa women's football (that doesn't really surprise me), but potentially higher than for the FIFA World cup. That might seem to be a surprise, but perhaps less so when you consider that just three of the countries in the T20 (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) have between them about 1.7 billion people.

You need to focus on the UK though where the women’s Euros we’re on free to air TV but the T20 was not.

[ProfessorDavey]

You need to focus on the UK though where the women’s Euros we’re on free to air TV but the T20 was not.

Sure - for SPOTY that's kind of obvious.

My point was about whether considering things on a global scale T20 world cricket has greater profile than women's Euros football.